User talk:108.248.176.172
Hi, welcome to Mass Effect Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Talk:Priority: Thessia page. ' '. It's an easy way to keep track of your contributions and helps you communicate with the rest of the community. Be sure to check out our Style Guide and Community Guidelines to help you get started, and please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Teugene (Talk) 09:46, 22 May 2012 Edit Warring Note that you are now edit warring over the Noveria: Peak 15 article, and edit warring is a bannable offense. I also like the fact you gave me zero chance to respond to you on the talk page, and just did what you did, which is forcing the issue. If you revert again, then my hands are tied, but I am going to respond. If you revert the article again, then again, my hands are tied. Lancer1289 00:40, May 31, 2012 (UTC) ::Excuse me, Lance, but you initiated the revert warring, as you well know, and then persisted in it without bothering to check the talk page (despite my request) to discuss the issue at hand. Do not now come here accusing and threatening me for an issue which arose from your lack of communication and your typical heavy-handed approach to disagreements on this wiki. I've already left a note about this on your talk page. If you persist in trying to get your way by throwing your wait and status around in conflict with policy and general wiki civility, I will find a more senior admin than yourself to take the subject up with. 01:45, May 31, 2012 (UTC) ::Ah, I see you instantly took that message down rather than consider that criticism was something you might leave there to consider. I'll just save that message here for posterity: ::"Your revert warring, poor communication and general edit megalomania" ::Hey there, ::I started this note to bring you the details on the talk page concerning the currently debated issue of the Farscape trivia note, since you decided to start revert warring before checking for or participating in discussion. But I see you've finally responded there, so I'll omit that portion of the message and leave it where it best belongs. ::But there is another issue I want to share with you something about my experience with this wiki so far. I've been using this fine reference for some months now, ever since the release of the third game and because I'm a long-time contributor to other, larger wiki projects, I've scanned the talk pages out of curiosity during that time. And as I did so, somehow I kept running into contentious arguments involving the same individual, over and over again, one guy patrolling virtually every square inch of this project with the most rabid case of wiki-ownership syndrome I've ever seen and butting heads with everybody, particularly riding rough-shod over new editors. A quick review of his talk page revealed the expected ::This is you, of course, that I'm speaking of. So I wasn't at all surprised when you decided to criticize my very first contribution to this project, despite the fact that it was on a talk page and you were absolutely wrong in your assessment. I was still less surprised still when you reverted the very first edit to an article's content on questionable grounds and without the effort to engage in discussion or solicit a third opinion. Look, your devotion to this project is clearly considerable and that level of involvement can sometimes lead to an understandable level of protectionism, but try to bear in mind that the fact that you are soon-to-make your 100-thousandth edit here and are an admin doesn't mean you own the place. If you're having so much trouble keeping up with discussing changes you make unilaterally about new content, then perhaps cut down on the number of pages you become involved with until you can treat other contributors with civility and full disclosure of the reasons behind your actions where necessary, rather than making snap decisions and then assuming they should stand simply because you are who you are. Certainly don't then come to my talk page and accuse me of edit warring when you clearly initiated the process, nor threaten me when I'm guilty of no inappropriate editing. ::Someone should really make it clear to a more senior admin how repulsive you make the prospect of participating in this project to new users, seemingly no matter what page the start out on. They might want to weight your admittedly voluminous contribution output against the overall future health of the community and project. 01:31, May 31, 2012 (UTC) :: 01:57, May 31, 2012 (UTC) (edit conflict)Wow more assumptions and more things about me. So much so that the half hour comment that I have been typing respoding to that message I am highly considering not leaving. But since you are completely wrong about a number of things, and you refuse to look at things beyond what you think is going on, I'm leaving it anyway. So here is that half an hour of work for you to read, maybe it will change your mind about a few things, but something tells me that it will not. :And I have reposted that below because I ask users specifcally to respond in any to comments that I leave them on their talk page not mine. This is stated in big red text at the top of my talk page. :I find your entire attitude, and this entire comment insulting, bigoted, rude, and just so uncalled for that the fact you even left it tells me about you, and it is nothing good. I do not throw my admin status around in situations like this, nor would I, and if I did, then I would have just ended it right then in and there and not responded on the talk page at all. That said, did you ever consider that other things might be going on? From all of your comments, I know you did not. I have been putting out fires since I logged back on after eating dinner, and dealt with them in order of how bad they were and which needed attention. There were two other situations that needed immediate attention due to multiple policy violations, edit warring, removal of valid information, and a host of other things. Your issue, was third on that list because I thought you could wait for a response before you did anything, yet I was clearly mistaken. Your situation is not the only one that is going on, nor was it the most urgent thing going on at the time. You need a lot more patience than you have demonstrated. Escalated more so by the fact that you cannot even wait for a response. From your comments at this point, I should have expected this. :It is also obvious that you also did not consider that I had other things going on outside of the wiki at the time. I cannot be here 24/7 and cannot address every issue at once. I would like to but I physically cannot. You need to consider other people and not just yourself when it comes to things like this. The fact you kept doing what you were doing meant that I had to leave the warning because if you had persisted, then my hands would have been tied. I figured I should at least tell you of this, and my intention to respond before action had to be taken. You could have just left a message on my talk page asking why I did what I did, and if I had any intention to take part in the discussion rather than forcing the issue, but you did not do that. Instead you bordered on violating on site policy, insulted me, berated me, and did not put me in a good mood by your attitude. You also fail to realize that any time someone forces an edit warring issue, a message if left, and there have been multiple instances when someone starts a discussion and then continues to force the issue, leading to a ban. Again, I figured I should inform you of this instead of just hitting the ban hammer as that is also rude and would do me no favors. :That said, every time someone starts a discussion, I am more than happy to take part in it. I do actually enjoy discussions, when they are appropriate, as it is usually a chance to work things out to allow something in an article in some way, or explain why something does not belong in an article. There are plenty of instances where I will take part in a discussion, as long as it is relevant to that article. :Did you also ever consider that I am the one doing a lot of the patrolling because I am the one who is on more than any other admin? From your comments, that is also apparently not the case. You never even considered where I'm coming from, what my situation is, what our site policies are, what is going on at the time, or anything else. You just did what you did with out ever considering anything. You made completely incorrect assumptions about what is going on, and acted on them, further escalating the situation. You are the one who made the assumptions, not me. :Did you also ever consider the fact that people do not like being told they are wrong? Or that some people will argue just to argue? Or that people will force their way, no matter what someone else tells them? Again, from your comments, no. You only considered your viewpoint, and did not consider anything else. Of course people are going to argue with admins, that is the way the world works, especially when they are told they are wrong. There are several policies here that people disagree with but at the same time they are there for a reason. You, apparently have never read any of those policies. :As to you pointing out, your first edit was actually not the appropriate place as that is a topic that belongs in the forums as someone asked a question that has no relevance to the article. It was asking about a character, not what the article is about. If the question had been about the article, for example "is there a med kit after the fight with the banshee" then I would have answered. However, that topic had no place there was much more appropriate in the forums or a blog post as that is where that kind of thing belongs. This has been made apparent by admins more recently as that policy has become enforced where it was previously quite lax. Under the way the policy is enforced today, there are a number of comments and discussions on talk pages that I would have been breaking that very policy. Did you consider that? Again from your comments, no. :If anyone has an attitude here, it is you based on your highly biased opinions, incomplete information, refusal to consider other factors, and general bad attitude. You are the one who has to remember that you are not the center of the universe, because that is how you acted with all of your comments. I am not unwilling to partake in discussions, but at the same time, you need to also consider that there are other things going on and I cannot respond instantly to you and put your requests at the top of the list. I have been the only admin on today and if more were on, then perhaps things might have gotten done faster, but since no one else is on, then things can only be done as fast as I can. Lancer1289 02:31, May 31, 2012 (UTC) By All Accounts... ...you should be banned already since you forced the issue and reverted again. However, since I am in probably the worst mood I have ever been in while editing here, and I do not know why I am doing this, I will not ban you. Why I do not know as I have every right, and would be perfectly supported under site policy and precedent in this case. Maybe this will also tell you that I am actually not the person you painted me as with your biased and wrongfully bigoted opinion. As to the ongoing issue, I noticed that yet another admin has come along and also called it subjective. So what happens now? Lancer1289 02:44, May 31, 2012 (UTC)